Friday, January 30, 2009

Demographic, and Immigration, Insanity

One of the very best of the Euro-Blogs, The Brussels Journal, has a series on the impending destruction of our culture by the forced infusion of Islamic culture upon the West. While this subject is well covered in Mark Steyn'e latest book, "America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It", today's installment of the series of posts in the Journal is stellar. A taste:
Question: What are these people doing in Europe? Who invited them? Who let them in? Who let them stay? What has allowed them to even dream about moving to Europe, let alone realizing a colonization plan?

In Great Britain alone, intelligence agencies are tracking 200 terrorists plots among Pakistani Brits, of whom some 2,000 are under observation. More than 400,000 Pakistani citizens of Great Britain travel every year to Pakistan – a country of 12,000 madrassas and, as of mid-2005, 55 terrorist training camps.

Why are there a million (1) Pakistanis in Great Britain? Just what has been going on in the brains of the British ruling elites these past 40 years? What has been going on in the brains of the ruled British people?

What are these people doing in the United States? We know how they came and who and what let them in, but why? The stock answer is: the left, to gain new voters; the right, to get cheap labor. But it’s not the real answer, except if this be a society of madmen.
For the rest of the story, read the whole thing.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

More on the "Stimulus" Plan

More on the "Stimulus" Plan

As time goes by we are seeing many more members of the commentariat analyzing the so-called "stimulus" bill and finding more and more things wrong with it. In fact, the House today voted in favor of the bill with every single congressional republican voting against, with about a dozen democrats also displaying clear vision. Mona Charen has a lucid essay on the reason democrats are going along with Obama:
Certainly President Obama seems supremely confident that the federal government, in his own capable hands, can tackle everything from job creation to education to global warming. All that is needed is to set aside "stale" partisan arguments and salute smartly.

President Obama was a teenager when some of the smartest liberals in America (dubbed the neoconservatives) were beginning to have doubts about the power of government to do good. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Nathan Glazer, Aaron Wildavksy, and many others observed the effects of Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" initiatives and became sobered up. (A few, including Moynihan, returned to the liberal fold but most did not.) They noticed the waste and the ineffectiveness of huge government programs, but above all, they were chastened by the law of unintended consequences -- that the unforeseen or indirect effects of government policy were usually more damaging and more important than the desired effects. Minimum wage laws are a good example. Intended to help the poor earn a living wage, they instead discouraged hiring of the low-skilled. Rent control was supposed to make it easier for the poor and middle class to afford apartments but wound up making low-cost housing less available.

It was, or should have been, frightening news that the United States is now $10.7 trillion in debt, sporting a $1.2 trillion deficit. As Mark Steyn noted, your pocket calculator doesn't have enough spaces to input one trillion dollars. The Democrats' solution is to make our deficit $2 trillion with a "stimulus" package. The Congressional Budget Office (run by Democrats) reports that -- all talk of "shovel ready" projects notwithstanding -- only about 25 percent of the new spending in the package would actually be spent by 2010. And it defies common sense to believe that transferring $100 billion from the federal government to the states to help with Medicare reimbursements will stimulate economic activity. Nor will $200 million to rehabilitate the National Mall in Washington, or $500 million to install new bomb detectors at airports, or $400 million to NASA to conduct climate change research (which several other agencies are already studying), and on and on.

We are, not to put too fine a point on it, about to send another trillion dollars of our money into a rat hole. Permanent tax cuts, for individuals and businesses, have been proven to stimulate the economy. They worked under Kennedy and Reagan. But to point this out now is like shouting into a whirlwind.

Peter Ferrara has more details in The American Spectator on the pork within the bill. You can read the 76 page "Recovery Report" (.pdf) congressional democrats produced to outline the bill, but Ferrara gets some of the more egregious items listed, as in:
The massive $825 billion package is not even targeted on programs to stimulate the economy. Instead, it is laced with runaway government spending for increased welfare, overgrown bureaucracy, pork, political payoffs, and other waste. That runaway spending is causing record smashing deficits of $1.5 trillion or more, equivalent to over 50% of the entire federal budget for fiscal 2008.

For example, the "stimulus" package includes $50 million for the National Endowment of the Arts to help "the arts community throughout the United States." Wouldn't want our economy to get behind in the international arts competition. The government is going to borrow $50 million out of the private economy to spend on this, which will result in a net loss of economic output rather than a net gain.

Another $2.1 billion is for Head Start, another program not previously known for stimulating the economy. A further $2 billion is to be spent on Child Care Development Block Grants, which provide day care. We are going to revive economic growth through the federal government spending billions on babysitting, rather than tax cuts for capital investment. A similar initiative involves $120 million to finance part-time work for seniors in community service agencies.

Then there is $500 million to speed the processing of applications for Social Security disability claims. This has already created one net new job in the employment of a person within the Obama Administration assigned to figure out what this has to do with stimulating the economy.

Another $6 billion goes to college and universities. We already spend hundreds of billions on these schools, and such education provides valuable long-term benefits. But this is not a means to spark a booming economy in the short term. The same is true of the $13 billion in Title I grants "to provide extra academic support to help raise the achievement of students at risk of educational failure or to help all students in high-poverty schools meet challenging State academic standards," as the congressional report accompanying the bill explains. Ditto that for the $13 billion in IDEA, Part B State grants to help pay for "the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities."

Then there is the effort to stimulate the economy by increasing welfare spending. There is $20 billion for increased food stamps, including lifting restrictions on how long welfare dependents can receive food stamp benefits. Another $1.7 billion is to be spent to help the homeless, not previously in our history a significant source of economic growth. Another $1 billion goes for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance program, to help low income families pay their heating bills, a worthy objective that has nothing to do with stimulating the economy. Still another billion goes to the Community Services Block Grant to support "employment, food, housing, health, and emergency assistance to low-income families and individuals." Another $200 million goes for senior nutrition programs, such as Meals on Wheels. Then there is an additional $200 million for AmeriCorps, to help satisfy "increased demand for services for vulnerable populations to meet critical needs in communities across the U.S." Another $5 billion is devoted to public housing. None of this increased welfare spending has anything to do with promoting economic growth. Rather, it retards growth by inducing more dependency on government.

Another $87 billion is to be spent on Medicaid, a welfare program already costing roughly $400 billion per year. Those funds would be spent in part on "family planning services," meaning contraception. Reagan created a 25-year economic boom in part by cutting top marginal income tax rates. Liberal Democrats are now going to try to do it by passing out condoms.

Medicaid is one of the major entitlement programs projected to explode to overwhelming costs in the future. Obama is assuring the more conservative Blue Dog Democrats that he will address runaway entitlement costs as soon as next month. But to start let's increase those costs by almost $100 billion right now.

Then there is the funding to maintain and expand bureaucracy and overall big government spending. The "stimulus" package includes $2.5 billion for the National Science Foundation, $2.0 billion for the National Park Service, $650 million for the U.S. Forest Service, $600 million for NASA, $800 million for AMTRAK, $276 million to the State Department to upgrade and modernize its information technology, $150 million for maintenance work at the Smithsonian Institution, $209 million for maintenance work for the Federal Agricultural Research Service, $44 million for repairs and improvements at the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the Department of Agriculture, and $245 million to upgrade the information technology of the Farm Service Agency. Borrowing money from the private sector to spend on these bureaucracies will not provide a boost to the economy. It will likely again produce a net loss of output.

A shocking provision provides $1.1 billion for so-called federal comparative effectiveness research in regard to health-care services. The congressional report explaining the stimulus bill says:

By knowing what works best and presenting this information more broadly to patients and healthcare professionals, those items, procedures, and interventions that are most effective to prevent, control, and treat health conditions will be utilized, while those that are found to be less effective and in some cases, more expensive, will no longer be prescribed.

But a government bureaucracy in Washington is never going to know what "items, procedures and interventions are most effective to prevent, control and treat health conditions" for each patient, regardless of how much federal research is done. This is what doctors are for. This bureaucratic initiative is really laying the foundation for the eventual health care rationing to be imposed under the new Obama "universal" health care entitlement program, which is coming soon. I told you so, in previous columns.

To call this spending economic recovery stimulus, however, is an abuse of the English language.

Another abuse is to be found in the $4.2 billion provided to the Neighborhood Stabilization Fund, which provides the funds to local governments to purchase and rehab vacant housing due to foreclosure. The congressional report accompanying the stimulus bill states, "Up to $750 million may be used for a competition for nonprofit entities to enhance the funding included under this heading through capitalization of the funds." Reportedly, this funding is intended to be siphoned off to ACORN, the far-left, rogue, lawbreaking organization prosecuted across the country in the past couple of years for voter fraud. ACORN has also used violent intimidation tactics in the past to pursue its goals, and was heavily involved in housing programs in the past that led to widespread bad loans.

Another $79 billion is to go the states to maintain their runaway government spending, particularly for such spendthrift jurisdictions as California, New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts. High state government spending is also not a source of economic growth.

Then there are other items in the "stimulus" package that may involve desirable government spending, but do not involve stimulating the economy, and should be subject to the normal budget process. These include $3 billion for health care prevention and wellness programs, such as childhood immunizations and other state and local public health programs, $2.4 billion for projects demonstrating carbon capture technology, $17 billion for Pell Grants, $1 billion for Technology Education, $1.9 billion for the Energy Department for "basic research into the physical sciences," $650 million for digital TV coupons to help Americans upgrade to digital cable television, $100 million to reduce lead-based paint hazards for children in low income housing, $400 million for "habitat restoration projects" of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, $1.2 billion for summer jobs for youth, $2 billion for Superfund cleanup, and others.

A massive power grab, a Trojan Horse, or however you characterize it, Peter Ferrara sums it up quite nicely:
Now what we have is not only a stimulus bill that will not work. What we have is a fraudulent bill that is not even focused on stimulus at all, but on runaway spending for liberal, big government spending programs, meaning more welfare, overgrown bureaucracy, pork, political payoffs, and waste.
I couldn't say it better than that.

Stimulate This

Stimulate This

Now that the stimulus bill is moving into final form, details are leaking out. Since most of the money will not be spent until the second and third year, it is not really a stimulus bill. It is rather more a Trojan horse bill, since it will contain quite a few special passengers. In the words of the president's chief of staff, “Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.”

Now reports are beginning to emerge, and one of the most insidious little bombs is the "decoupling" provision for utility rates. What this means is there will be no further link between electric rates, say, and the amount of electricity you use. That means that, as we are forced (or choose) to use more efficient appliances and our electrical use goes down, the rates will go up to compensate. Then, when or if we buy electric vehicles, the rates will remain high. Or presumably we can ask our legislators (nicely) to pass a new law setting special rates for electrical vehicle use. But even that is dependent on the utilities installing new electric meters, so that the "special" use can be rated on the lower, politically correct rate for electric vehicles. But then the gasoline tax and road use taxes will be piled on the electric rates.

While we are on this subject of Obama "calling for forty million meters to be installed" it might be interesting to look into the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005, which directed state utility commissions to install the new meters. But since Bush signed that legislation, Obama has "called" for exactly the same thing, so as to get the credit. "Utilities are planning to deploy more than 40 million smart meters throughout the country from 2007 through 2010, according to a report published by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission." But now that Obama wants it, and money has no real value any more, it is now for the government to pay for them, with their usual crack efficiency and timeliness.

This is pretty clear, we are getting screwed by this stimulus plan. It is the un-stimulus screw - no stimulation, no kisses, no lube.

If you have a head for details, or you think I'm kidding, you can read the report (.pdf) summarizing the bill. Not to worry, it is a mere 76 pages.

Monday, January 26, 2009

Our New Era of Responsibility

Our New Era of Responsibility

Our new president has proclaimed a "new era of responsibility" in his inaugural address. As Orwell defined Newspeak, the import of the words are exactly the opposite of what the words mean. Not to blame Barry for everything, since the situation predates Obama by decades.

Our nation's attempt to create an idiot proof society has cast us adrift from our moorings. We used to be a nation with a "can do" attitude. It was We the People who got things done, each of us, as well as all of us. Everyone believed they could make a difference, at the very least in our own lives. That valuable but not enough treasured ethic is dying, and almost dead. Our new president is going to accelerate the demise of the best of the American spirit.

This thesis is explored in today's Wall Street Journal by Philip K. Howard. A few quotes:

America achieved greatness as the can-do society. This is, after all, the country of Thomas Paine and barn raisings, of Grange halls and Google. Other countries shared, at least in part, our political freedoms, but America had something different -- a belief in the power of each individual. President Obama's clarion call of self-determination -- "Yes We Can" -- hearkens back to the core of our culture.

Americans don't feel free to reach inside themselves and make a difference. The growth of litigation and regulation has injected a paralyzing uncertainty into everyday choices. All around us are warnings and legal risks. The modern credo is not "Yes We Can" but "No You Can't." Our sense of powerlessness is pervasive. Those who deal with the public are the most discouraged. Most doctors say they wouldn't advise their children to go into medicine. Government service is seen as a bureaucratic morass, not a noble calling. Make a difference? You can't even show basic human kindness for fear of legal action. Teachers across America are instructed never to put an arm around a crying child.

The idea of freedom as personal power got pushed aside in recent decades by a new idea of freedom -- where the focus is on the rights of whoever might disagree. Daily life in America has been transformed. Ordinary choices -- by teachers, doctors, officials, managers, even volunteers -- are paralyzed by legal self-consciousness. Did you check the rules? Who will be responsible if there's an accident? A pediatrician in North Carolina noted that "I don't deal with patients the same way any more. You wouldn't want to say something off the cuff that might be used against you."

And so today we witness a high school coach being indicted for homicide for denying a player water for fifteen minutes.

All this law, we're told, is just the price of making sure society is in working order. But society is not working. Disorder disrupts learning all day long in many public schools -- the result in part, studies by NYU Professor Richard Arum found, of the rise of student rights. Health care is like a nervous breakdown in slow motion. Costs are out of control, yet the incentive for doctors is to order whatever tests the insurance will pay for. Taking risks is no longer the badge of courage, but reason enough to get sued. There's an epidemic of child obesity, but kids aren't allowed to take the normal risks of childhood. Broward County, Fla., has even banned running at recess.

So no little babies get hurted, all the others must stand around and become wimps. There is the other, related problem with the feminization of the American boys and men, but that is another, related problem. The radicals who want manly men to disappear use the courts to get their way in the schools.

The new legal order doesn't honor the individuality of human accomplishment. People accomplish things by focusing on the goal, and letting their instincts, mainly subconscious, try to get them there. "Amazingly few people," management guru Peter Drucker observed, "know how they get things done." Most things happen, the philosopher Michael Polanyi wrote, through "the usual process of trial and error by which we feel our way to success." Thomas Edison put it this way: "Nothing that's any good works by itself. You got to make the damn thing work."

Modern law pulls the rug out from under all those human powers and substitutes instead a debilitating self-consciousness. Teachers lose their authority, Prof. Arum found, because the overhang of law causes "hesitation, doubt and weakening of conviction." Skyrocketing health-care costs are impossible to contain as long as doctors go through the day thinking about how they will defend themselves if a sick person sues.

The overlay of law on daily choices destroys the human instinct needed to get things done. Bureaucracy can't teach. Rules don't make things happen. Accomplishment is personal. Anyone who has felt the pride of a job well done knows this.

But the "Hope and Change Express" promises us more rules, more bureaucracy, more destruction of personal responsibility and accomplishment. Less pride, more debt, more taxes.

When advancing the cause of freedom, law today is all proscription and no protection. There are no boundaries, just a moving mudbank comprised of accumulating bureaucracy and whatever claims people unilaterally choose to assert. People wade through law all day long. Any disagreement in the workplace, any accident, any incidental touching of a child, any sick person who gets sicker, any bad grade in school -- you name it. Law has poured into daily life.

That gets the flavor of the problem. I am not sure that I agree with Phil Howard's prescription for getting us out of this mess, but I know that we are under a desperate assault by rules and laws, and ultimately lawyers. Now that the Leftists, beholden, nay, in thrall to the lawyers, are in charge of at least two of our three branches of government, no matter that you believe we should to roll back the tide, we are certain to see the tide oncoming for quite a while.

But never be despondent! History shows that, in retrospect, everything works out for the best. The problem is, we may not live long enough to see things work out. So I have come around to the proposition that I hope for Obama's presidency to fail - to fail big, and to fail fast. Only by complete failure, and I am talking failure on the scale of a Carter, total, abject, undeniable failure, will the electorate come to understand that we need to throw all the bums out, and elect a new majority. Not an ideological majority, that would not be a zero base approach. What we need is to throw out the incumbents, whose minds and souls are poisoned from their well worn habits of taking from us and feeding their own.

Only a huge failure of our government can save us from that government. Think about it, discuss it. This is not going away by itself.

Friday, January 23, 2009



I have no idea where this "Obama is an intellectual" trope came from, but it is absolutely untrue. An intellectual is a person who exercises his creative and mental powers over all else. He writes, he may teach. He is surely not a pol. Let's get this trope off the table. A pol is a person who bends others to his will, his quest for power, not a man who convinces others with his ideas. Name a single new or unique idea our new leader has had, I dare you. Not an intellectual by a long shot.

While we are at it, how are we to know that this guy is so smart? I have not seen any testing on him that impresses me more than the work done to quantify the IQs of Bush and Kerry. If he is smarter than either of those, I have not seen any evidence of it - just unsubstantiated statements. And he clearly has no intellectual achievements to compare to Bill Clinton's.

Not that this means anything. Great leaders are men such as Reagan and FDR. Oliver Wendell Holmes admiringly and famously said of FDR that he had a "first rate attitude, second rate temperament." (Churchill said about the same thing substituting "attitude" for "temperament") Few would call Reagan a deep thinker, but his thinking had clarity. This nuanced thinking we get from pretenders like Kerry, and now maybe we will get much of the same from "The One," drives me to distraction. It may be possible that Obama is capable of clear thinking, but as Rush and others say, liberals will never tell you what they believe, because you would then reject them.

It is the liberal propensity to call republicans idiots. Remember, Kerry was supposed to be some sort of a genius too. Only when he lost did the Left admit that he was a dork who ran an incompetent campaign, and research revealed his IQ to be about the same as G.W.Bush's. They said that Clinton was a genius, but at least they had a leg to stand on with that one, Rhodes Scholar and all. But he did too much of his thinking with his little head. Then they called G.H.W.Bush an idiot and a tool, Reagan an idiot and a fool, but before that Carter was called a genius nuclear engineer! All he ever did in that line was to grease the machinery in a nuclear submarine, but to the leftist media in this country, they do not need much to get off and running. Leftist guys are smart, righties are dumb. Don't you get it? This is a universal truth of the Left. Read Trotsky or Goebbels.

No. I believe that the guy who becomes president is always the guy who is an absolute genius at utilizing the tools that exist to claim power over others. That makes them smart enough to be our rulers, that's all. Any claim to higher intelligence on broader matters requires evidence - evidence that is lacking on all our presidents since Jefferson, sadly.

I rather think that Obama is a pragmatist, and when his liberalism fails him, he will change horses rather than becoming irrelevant like Carter. Time will tell. We are in deep trouble if he is an intellectual, who has pondered and decided to go all ideological on us. If so, we might just have a revolution on our hands real soon. Remember, if one and a half percent had voted the other way, we would be making fun of president McCain right now. There is scant support for another bailout, government health care for everybody and much higher taxes. Keep piling it on, and we the people will push back come election day next.

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Letter From Britain to America

Letter From Britain to America

The following letter has been attributed to British sources, but I have been unable to discern its provenance. In any case, it is too good to ignore, so I reproduce it here, sadly without attribution:

Obama’s Victory

A victory for the hysterical Oprah Winfrey, the mad racist preacher Jeremiah Wright, the mainstream media who abandoned any sense of objectivity long ago, Europeans who despise America largely because they depend on her, comics who claim to be dangerous and fearless but would not dare attack genuinely powerful special interest groups.

A victory for Obama-worshippers everywhere. A victory for the cult of the cult. A man who has done little with his life but has written about his achievements as if he had found the cure for cancer in between winning a marathon and building a nuclear reactor with his teeth.

Victory for style over substance, hyperbole over history, rabble-raising over reality.

A victory for Hollywood, the most dysfunctional community in the world. Victory for Streisand, Spielberg, Soros and Sarandon.

Victory for those who prefer welfare to will and interference to independence. For those who settle for group think and herd mentality rather than those who fight for individual initiative and the right to be out of step with meager political fashion.

Victory for a man who is no friend of freedom. He and his people have already stated that media has to be controlled so as to be balanced, without realizing the extraordinary irony within that statement. Like most liberal zealots, the Obama worshippers constantly speak of Fox and Limbaugh, when the vast bulk of television stations and newspapers are drastically liberal and anti-conservative. Senior Democrat Chuck Schumer said that just as pornography should be censored, so should talk radio. In other words, one of the few free and open means of popular expression may well be cornered and beaten by bullies who even in triumph cannot tolerate any criticism and opposition.

A victory for those who believe the state is better qualified to raise children than the family, for those who prefer teachers’ unions to teaching and for those who are naively convinced that if the West is sufficiently weak towards its enemies, war and terror will dissolve as quickly as the tears on the face of a leftist celebrity.

A victory for social democracy even after most of Europe has come to the painful conclusion that social democracy leads to mediocrity, failure, unemployment, inflation, higher taxes and economic stagnation. A victory for intrusive lawyers, banal sentimentalists, social extremists and urban snobs

Congratulations, America!

Friday, January 16, 2009

Mars Gets More Interesting

Mars Gets More Interesting

A report getting play recently shows that Methane is being emitted from underground sources on Mars. Since there is no evidence of volcanic activity on the red planet, it is supposed that a biological source is possible, if not probable, for this basic building block of life as we know it. As principal investigator Michael Mumma, of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center said, "Suppose we put a probe into a fissure at one of the release sites site and we could get measurements from some extant life form," he said. "We could then sequence the life form and see if it had the same origins as Earth life. What could be more compelling?"

Lisa Pratt of Indiana University, who was part of a team that identified a microbe two miles down in a South African gold mine that lives entirely without drawing energy from sunlight said, "Mars just got a whole lot more interesting." Pratt called the methane find "a breathtaking discovery."

On another note, I recently saw a documentary about Venus, which has the hottest weather in the solar system. It was claimed that excessive heat is present on the surface of Venus due to the atmosphere being predominately made up of carbon dioxide. At the time I just chalked this statement up to the AGW hysteria current in Western scientific circles. What I found very interesting about that in regard to the latest findings about Mars is that, along the way, it is revealed in the articles on the methane discovery on Mars that the atmosphere of Mars is also predominately carbon dioxide. See the Goddard article which states "Mars today is a world of cold and lonely deserts, apparently without life of any kind, at least on the surface. Worse still, it looks like Mars has been cold and dry for billions of years."

Mars has no globally warming greenhouse effect, yet the ambiguity is never mentioned in any of the reports I have read. Imagine that!

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Another Transition Stumble, Test

Another Transition Stumble, Test

Another stumble from the messiah-in-chief involving his pick for Treasury Secretary will test the degree of Teflon there remains on our last hope to save the world. So far Obama's pick for Commerce had a commercial problem, and now his pick to assume management of our tax system has a problem with, among other things, failing to pay taxes. He may have also employed an undocumented alien as household help. In the past, illegal maids (recall Zoe Baird, BJ Clinton's first pick for attorney general), or even providing shelter to an indigent illegal immigrant (recall Linda Chavez, Bush's original nominee for Labor secretary), have sunk cabinet nominees.

Lesser men have folded under similar circumstances. But Obama is made of sterner stuff. Plus, Geithner has two aces in the hole. One, of course, is the democrats, who want so much to recreate the nation in their own image that they will do nothing to impair the lubricant in the governmental canal that Obama is sliding into. Then we have the republicans, who seem to fear the alternative to Geithner. They have no faith in Obama, and seem to believe that this nominee is the best they will get from the new president. In that they are probably right.

What seems to have been lost here is the most simple of qualifications for public office - propriety. Congress, more than the other branches, is drunk with power. I do not use the cliche loosely. They seem to be literally drunk, no longer concerned with consequences, lurching forward with no regard to law or the constitution. They vote trillions of dollars in "bailout" funds with no regard to pretending, even, that they have a way to "pay" for it. Deficits? They don't need to worry about no stinkin' deficits. One trillion? Two? What's the difference?

What good is the rule of law when the lawmakers are lawless? Geithner is only the latest in a litany of lawless moves by the people in power. It will be a litmus test for Obama. We shall see if he sticks with his nominee, or throws him away, like Richardson, Ayers, or Wright. It would be a test for Congress as well, except there is little doubt that the democrats will confirm any nominee the chosen one wants.

Wednesday, January 07, 2009

Dane Dahl on Islam - Why They Fight

Dane Dahl on Islam - Why They Fight

In the not too distant future, Moslem extremists hope to involve you and your loved ones, as well as a vast number of other innocent victims in a man-made catastrophe: an organized and violent calamity of biblical proportions that is based on teachings that were deliberately added to the Koran, decades after the faith was founded.

Disregarding the social, economic, and political factors that serve as underpinnings for Islamic terrorism, I will address the more fundamental issue: the religious teachings that sanction violence against non-Moslems and AGAINST ALL WOMEN. Here are seven verses from the Koran. These scriptures have been translated into modern English.

…murder, crucify, or cut off the hands and feet of non-Moslems - Chapter 5 Verse 33 - The Koran
…create terror in the hearts of non-Moslems …cut off their heads - Chapter 8 Verse 12 - The Koran
…and fight non-Moslems until Allah’s religion is the only one - Chapter 8 Verse 39 - The Koran
…of all the loot you plunder from non-Moslems, 20% belongs to Allah and to Mohammed. - Chapter 8 Verse 41- The Koran (Author’s note: Loot included kidnapped female sex-slaves.)
…Take as many as four wives from the women you are sexually attracted to - Chapter 4 Verse 3 - The Koran
…God has made men superior to women… Virtuous women are obedient. If a woman becomes disobedient, beat her. - Chapter 4 Verse 34 - The Koran
…When it comes to marriage, Allah makes it legal for you to take as wives, women whom your right hand possesses. - Chapter 33 Verse 50 - The Koran (Author’s note: This verse talks about the “loot” non-Moslems call… kidnapped female sex-slaves.)

Most people in the western world have never heard of these astonishing scriptures, but they are in the Koran … along with a relatively short list of others, just like them. This is important because not all Moslems are the same; there are two very different types. Militant Moslems view these verses as commandments from their god – a primitive desert god, from an ancient land of heat, sand and scorpions. Militant Moslems think these teachings apply to life in the Twenty-first Century and they try to use them, regardless of the suffering and mayhem they create, whereas moderate Moslems ignore such verses because they were uttered a long time ago, when the Arabian peninsula, from whence Islam came, was a wild and savage place.

Historians tell us these terrorist teachings are part of a cluster of ferocious beliefs that were deliberately added to one specific part of the formerly peaceful and tolerant Koran. These startling changes were made, decades after Islam was first founded in the Arabian city of Mecca. By the time of these changes the original (and real) prophet of Islam was dead. Thereafter the religious headquarters was uprooted and moved to the city of Medina. In its new environment, with new leadership at the helm, Islam mutated; it turned cruel and predatory.

The historical record reveals that Islam didn’t simply fall from the sky as a full-blown religion, but rather evolved from a persecuted sect of Jewish-Christians. The first Moslems lived in the city of Mecca; they were actually part of a larger group of Jesus’ followers called the Ebionites.

Ebionites were peace-loving disciples of Christ, who shared their wealth with fellow believers, and taught that a man should marry only one wife.

In fact, women were much more independent in the Ebionite Jewish-Christian days of Islam. They were more influential too. I say this because my research has determined that the first prophet of Islam may have been someone other than Mohammed: I believe the first prophet was a very special Arabian princess named Khadija the Pure. Khadija was Mohammed’s first and only wife for twenty-four years. Khadija was fifteen years older than Mohammed. She was considered to be fabulously wealthy, and she was Mohammed’s employer, before she became his wife.

Mohammed on the other hand, before he became Khadija’s employee, was an impoverished youth who had been raised as an orphan. Ultimately Mohammed worked his way up to a position as Khadija’s business manager. With time, Khadija grew fond of Mohammed. She even married him. However, Khadija was a liberated woman. In fact, Khadija was the one who initiated the marriage proposal to Mohammed! And after their wedding, she never allowed Mohammed to take other wives, or have other women in her house.

Throughout her lifetime, even though Khadija had already converted to Christianity, Mohammed’s first and only wife for twenty-four years remained an important Arabian princess in the ruling family that controlled worship in the Kabba Temple, with it’s pantheon of more than three hundred pagan gods and goddesses. Clearly, in the early days of Islam, Khadija was a person of great influence in Arabian society: and clearly Mohammed, her husband… was not.

After Khadija’s untimely death from a terrible illness, Islam was hijacked by a cartel of corrupt men, headed by Mohammed himself. The faith was abruptly relocated to the city of Medina and new beliefs were added to the Koran; at the same time, old beliefs were deleted or relegated to unimportance, and the religion was changed beyond recognition. In the end, Islam abandoned many of its Ebionite Jewish-Christian teachings. Women suffered the most: they became the focus of repression, scorn, and violence.

Today, although moderate Moslems are loath to admit these ideas, and many of them are terrified to voice criticism of their militant Islamic brothers, because of fear that violence will come to them and their families, the fact remains that these added teachings are not the original beliefs of Islam; they are amendments: They are the terrorist teachings of Islam.

In the near future, militant Moslems hope to unleash a Jihad: a Moslem holy war upon the non-Moslem world; not only upon Israel, the United States and Western Europe, but also throughout parts of Asia, including India and maybe even China, and Japan. Because the terrorist teachings of Islam sanction treaty breaking, deception, and war, as well as looting, murder, kidnapping, terrorism, and human slavery (including sexual slavery), so long as these crimes are directed against non-Moslems, there is no limit to the things these fanatics can do. But the scariest part: Militant Moslems will do everything… in the name of their primitive desert god.

Once victory is attained in this violent holy war, these fanatics believe Allah will bless them with harems of kidnapped sex slaves taken from destroyed cities and nations, as well as enormous fortunes of loot plundered from the non-Moslem world. They believe this because of the terrorist teachings that were added to the Koran. These terrorist teachings even say ransoms paid to Moslem terrorists, to redeem stolen property (like hijacked oil tankers and cargo ships) as well as kidnapped men, women, and children, are part of the Islamic loot these vicious criminals are entitled to receive.

These same terrorist teachings even allow Moslem men to force their kidnapped female sex slaves to marry them in Moslem wedding ceremonies, and bear children for them: whether the women want to or not. Terrorist Moslem teachings mandate only two requirements: The women must come from Christian or Jewish backgrounds, and secondly, if the unfortunate women resist, these same terrorist teachings say the Moslem husbands must beat them, and imprison them in their own homes.

If the Moslem fanatics die while committing these crimes against humanity, as an eternal reward for their cruel deeds Islamic extremists believe their fierce desert god will admit them to paradise and bless them with luxurious palaces filled with riches and populated by seventy-two virgin brides, who are exquisitely beautiful, yet modest enough to struggle to control their unbridled lust to have sexual intercourse with a dead Moslem terrorist.

With these stinging indictments against terrorist Islamic doctrines entered into the record, it is important to remember that the majority of Moslems are moderate, decent people who love God and practice acts of charity and kindness to their neighbors, both Moslem and non-Moslem. Such moderate Moslems recognize these violent teachings as obsolete and out of place in the Twenty-first Century. In the author’s opinion, in spite of enormous cultural and ideological differences that exist between the non-Moslem world and the followers of Islam, it is with this moderate Moslem majority that any long-term resolution to the Islamic terrorism issue will ultimately be negotiated.

However, given the massive population increases taking place in the Moslem world, at a time when poverty, chaos, criminality, and religious fanaticism are burgeoning, the numbers of Moslems worldwide who declare themselves militant is increasing; the influence their growing networks of terror cells exert on Islamic governments throughout the world has reached crisis levels. Because of the terrorist teachings of Islam, modern civilization faces a nightmarish future; the attacks on Mumbai, India, the World Trade Center in New York, and the subway bombings in Spain and London are simply previews of things to come. In this ferocious Jihad, nuclear and biological weapons are almost certain to come into play.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill: The road before us will be long and dangerous and terrifying; the United States and Europe and Asia must be resolute… and take courage. We must work together to neutralize militant Islamic movements… and if necessary… wage war against the governments that sustain them. At the same time, the non-Moslem world must also nurture moderate Islamic states and establish strong alliances with them. The very survival of our civilization depends on it.

Are you are interested in learning more about an array of Islamic topics including:
1. Who are The Seventy-two Virgins of Islam and how did they become part of militant Moslem dogma?
2. What role did the Ebionites and Khadija the Pure play, in founding the original (peaceful) religion of Islam?
3. What role does militant Islam play in modern human slavery?

Visit The Moslem Institute website:

Dane Dahl
Author and Historian